![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dudley,
Another thing that's missing here is the British attitude to the rest of the world. They're an island in size but a continent in approach to life. And they don't like foreigners even more than Americans don't. They don't like things that weren't invented here and, in fact, have an entire organization, the Civil Aviation Authority, who enforce that idea whenever possible. The number of aircraft that are certified for aerobatics in the US, but not in the UK is staggering. I dunno, maybe physics really IS different here. They do things the way they want to, sod the rest of the world. The issue of the range of the Kollman window just isn't a concern over here as explained above, so I can see why no one would take that into account (unless Brit Kollman windows have a greater range, I don't know) Shawn "Dudley Henriques" wrote in message link.net... BINGO!! Understanding the QFE question requires the understanding that all anticipated destinations are below the limit parameters of the Kollsman window....which is correct enough....but like most regulations, the way it's written is just plain nuts!!!! Why the hell the powers that be would put in a QFE option without explaining that it's tied directly to the Kollsman parameters on the altimeters is beyond me. I must know a hundred pilots who think it's an available option anywhere!!! :-)) It's funny about things like this. I've been reading everything I can find on the use of QFE, even that American Airlines had tried having their first officers monitoring a QFE altimeter with the Captain using a standard altimeter setting on final approaches, (which I understand is no longer the case BTW) and there is absolutely nothing out there that specifies the limiting parameter for QFE due to Kollsman range limits on the instrument for airports outside the instrument parameters. It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just assume that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports under 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!! I have to admit, it's basic enough, but for someone reading the regulations, the assumption is that a QFE setting is available at all anticipated destinations. I haven't found a reference anywhere that explains QFE as available only within the Kollsman range. Understanding the regulation seems to require a prior knowledge of the Kollsman limits to understand the situation completely, which in many cases causes much misinterpretation of the QFE options. Dudley "Todd Pattist" wrote in message ... "Dudley Henriques" wrote: how can a QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in the U.S? I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and Scotland only goes to 4400'. Todd Pattist (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) ___ Make a commitment to learn something from every flight. Share what you learn. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
Please help -- It's down to the wire | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 12 | July 14th 04 06:05 PM |
FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING | The Ink Company | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 5th 03 12:07 AM |
How I got to Oshkosh (long) | Doug | Owning | 2 | August 18th 03 12:05 AM |
Airport Manager position, Fitchburg, MA | David Reinhart | Piloting | 6 | August 12th 03 11:46 PM |